before we go any further, post your definition, in your words.*Beekeeper » 21 Aug 2025, 5:22 pm » wrote: ↑ What's in "italics" you claim as your "definition" isn't any kind of definition.
Blackvegetable » 21 Aug 2025, 5:41 pm » wrote: ↑ before we go any further, post your definition, in your words.
By NOT posting one, you PROVE you have no definition. Smart people defend themselves BY POSTING the definition when requested. DUMB AS **** idiots duck, dodge, and refuse to.*Beekeeper » 22 Aug 2025, 5:52 am » wrote: ↑ Nope. I have no need to post one.
Now you sound frustrated.
Blackvegetable » 22 Aug 2025, 7:04 am » wrote: ↑ By NOT posting one, you PROVE you have no definition. Smart people defend themselves BY POSTING the definition when requested. DUMB AS **** idiots duck, dodge, and refuse to.
You sound really upset now.Blackvegetable » 22 Aug 2025, 7:04 am » wrote: ↑ By NOT posting one, you PROVE you have no definition. Smart people defend themselves BY POSTING the definition when requested. DUMB AS **** idiots duck, dodge, and refuse to.
Blackvegetable » 22 Aug 2025, 7:04 am » wrote: ↑ By NOT posting one, you PROVE you have no definition. Smart people defend themselves BY POSTING the definition when requested. DUMB AS **** idiots duck, dodge, and refuse to.
You going to RUN NOW??Blackvegetable » Fri Aug 22, 2025 8:04 am » wrote: ↑
Fri Aug 22, 2025 8:04 am
By NOT posting one, you PROVE you have no definition. Smart people defend themselves BY POSTING the definition when requested. DUMB AS **** idiots duck, dodge, and refuse to.You sound really upset now.
Just so you know, I have the CORRECT definition of survivorship bias, but obviously YOU DON'T and until you realize that I don't play your game, you'll continue to LOSE!!
Until WE GET YOUR DEFINTION, you get NOTHING!!
Just so you know, WWII bombers are a great example!!
You're an unusually stupid human being, Fondler..*Beekeeper » 22 Aug 2025, 7:15 am » wrote: ↑ You sound really upset now.
Just so you know, I have the CORRECT definition of survivorship bias, but obviously YOU DON'T and until you realize that I don't play your game, you'll continue to LOSE!!
Until WE GET YOUR DEFINTION, you get NOTHING!!
Just so you know, WWII bombers are a great example!!
not in your words...Just so you know, I have the CORRECT definition of survivorship bias,
you are the dumbest **** alive...Until WE GET YOUR DEFINTION, you get NOTHING!!
know all about it.Just so you know, WWII bombers are a great example!!
DMA*Beekeeper » 22 Aug 2025, 7:23 am » wrote: ↑ You going to RUN NOW??
As you always do. Especially when you get it handed back to you and you have NOTHING!!
Did you ever wonder why we call you Runny?? Because you RUN THAT MOUTH and say NOTHING!!
Blackvegetable » 22 Aug 2025, 7:24 am » wrote: ↑ You're an unusually stupid human being, Fondler..
viewtopic.php?p=2787210#p2787210
not in your words...
you are the dumbest **** alive...
Hands down.
know all about it.
Were those YOUR words?*Beekeeper » 22 Aug 2025, 8:30 am » wrote: ↑ Awww. You sound really upset.
And your insults are still WAY below my standards of what a decent human being should be.
answer the question *******
Do your words suggest to you that you are upset?*Beekeeper » 22 Aug 2025, 9:17 am » wrote: ↑ You're really upset. It shows.
You mean you still don't want to know about WW II Bombers and how that is a great example of survivorship bias??
I guess you really have NO DEFINITION OR EXAMPLES you can use, so you run. Right Runny??
my definition has been posted, repeatedly..I guess you really have NO DEFINITION OR EXAMPLES you can use
Blackvegetable » 22 Aug 2025, 9:31 am » wrote: ↑ Do your words suggest to you that you are upset?
Even @rippy 38 knows the bomber story....what I want is to see a definition - in your words.
my definition has been posted, repeatedly..
where's yours?
Blackvegetable » 22 Aug 2025, 9:31 am » wrote: ↑ Do your words suggest to you that you are upset?
Even @rippy 38 knows the bomber story....what I want is to see a definition - in your words.
my definition has been posted, repeatedly..
where's yours?
A while back I showed him the same thing about the bombers, like a ****** he ram then, as well.*Beekeeper » 22 Aug 2025, 9:17 am » wrote: ↑ You're really upset. It shows.
You mean you still don't want to know about WW II Bombers and how that is a great example of survivorship bias??
I guess you really have NO DEFINITION OR EXAMPLES you can use, so you run. Right Runny??
Blackvegetable » 22 Aug 2025, 9:31 am » wrote: ↑ Do your words suggest to you that you are upset?
Even @rippy 38 knows the bomber story....what I want is to see a definition - in your words.
my definition has been posted, repeatedly..
where's yours?
He's only showing how truly UNEDUCATE he really is.*Huey » 22 Aug 2025, 9:59 am » wrote: ↑ A while back I showed him the same thing about the bombers, like a ****** he ram then, as well.